FILM CENSORSHIP

Evening Star, Issue 19805, 2 March 1928, Page 5

FILM CENSORSHIP

DISCUSSION IN COMMONS

Prtss Association—By Telegraph—Copyright.

LONDON, March 1 (Received March 2, at 11.5 a.m.)

The Cavell film led to a series of questions in the House of Commons on film censorship. Mr Hall suggested that the Government department be made responsible for the matter. Sir W. Joynson-Hicks (Homo Secretary) said that hitherto there was insufficient evidence to show that the present system bad failed on the whole to secure an adequate standard system based on licensing by local authorities, who generally relied on the Board of Film Censors. Whore tbo latter did not pass a film it was open to the owners to apply to the local authorities for permission to show tbo film. Tbo Government was satisfied that the matter was better left to the municipalities. Mr Hall: “Then why should a member of Cabinet approach the censor with a view to banning the film? ” Mr Maclean: “If it is proposed to leave tbo matter to the municipalities, why not abolisli the Board of Film Censors?”—A. and N.Z. and ‘Sun’ Cable.

HOME SECRETARY TO MAKE STATEMENT.

LONDON, March ]

(Received March 2, at 12.30 p.m.)

In the House of Commons Sir Joyn-son-Hicks said: “I imagine that the House will desire to leave the fullest discretion to the municipalities. When the scheme of censorship is debated I will be prepared to make a full .statement on the origin and progress of censorship.”—A. and N.Z. and ‘Sun’ Cable.